COLUMBIA, S.C. — President Obama delivered good news for the Port of Charleston last month, but it hasn’t softened South Carolina leaders’ stance against the Savannah harbor deepening.

“There are serious concerns with what the Savannah port wants to do on the South Carolina side,” said Leon Stavrinakis, a Charleston Democrat serving in the South Carolina House.

Among those concerns: that cadium-tainted dredge spoils will contaminate Jasper County shores, that a planned dissolved-oxygen injection system won’t keep fish alive and that saltwater will contaminate fresh water.

“And those are not abated by the fact that the Port of Charleston, which is a much easier and more sensible project for the government to undertake, is going to move forward in an expedited way,” said Stavrinakis.

The White House has listed both Charleston and Savannah harbor deepening projects among five to be completed ahead of schedule. The initiative aims for the federal review process and Record of Decision to deepen the Savannah River from 42 feet to 47 to be done by November.

It also calls the federal reviews for the Port of Charleston’s plans to deepen from 45 feet to at least 50 feet to be done by September 2015.

Environmental groups, the S.C. Department of Natural Resources and South Carolina legislators have argued against Georgia’s plans, citing the potential damage to the river.

Meanwhile, South Carolina supporters of the proposed $5 billion Jasper Ocean Terminal, a shared port planned for South Carolina’s side of the river, also insist that President Obama’s decision to speed up the deepening timelines does nothing to address their contention that a one-way, 47-foot deep Savannah River won’t be useful to the future Jasper port.

South Carolina Ports Authority public relations manager Allison Skipper said the agency never took a position against the Savannah harbor deepening based on competitive fears.

“The president’s program does not in any way supersede what’s being permitted in either project,” said Skipper. “It’s simply a directive to move more quickly. The reality is we compete with all ports.”

Denver Merrill, vice president of the Maritime Association of S.C., said the organization is confident Charleston’s natural attributes, such as its closeness to the ocean, will ultimately land the South Carolina port ahead of others.

Plus, he said, Georgia has to contend with the uncertainty of various legal hurdles.

With the expanded Panama Canal to be completed in 2014, ports are racing to prepare for larger container vessels.

Rivalries between ports are nothing new, but the South Carolina-Georgia relationship is unique because they share the Savannah River and that brings with itunique regulatory interactions, debates over water rights, and legal tangles.

State Rep. Bill Herbkersman, R-Bluffton, said the inclusion of both Savannah and Charleston harbor projects on the list could ease some of the angst in South Carolina over competitiveness with Georgia.

“But we’re not going to let our guard down,” he said. “We’re still going to push hard both environmentally and for preparing for a Jasper port and obviously for Charleston.”

And like Stavrinakis, the Bluffton lawmaker pointed to environmental risks associated with dredging the Savannah River.

“To the degree we need to fight for both the South Carolina environment and South Carolina business community, we’re going to do that, whether our governor wants to join or not,” Stavrinakis said.

That was a jab at Republican Gov. Nikki Haley who’s been criticized by both parties for granting Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal’s request to give the Savannah harbor deepening another chance after her state environmental board had rejected permits sought by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

Comments have been more muted among the Palmetto State’s business community.

Otis Rawl, president and CEO of the S.C. Chamber of Commerce, said the business community is looking forward to having several upgraded harbors competing for their business and offering them lower prices.

“We’re going to keep our eye on the ball in Charleston and make sure it gets done,” Rawl said. “But we need multiple locations to get our goods in and out of the country, and competition for rates is good business.”

Asked whether Haley thinks the White House initiative should ease her state’s fears toward Georgia, the governor’s spokesman said, “This is a huge win for Charleston, and as we’ve said all along, there is nothing for South Carolina to fear.”

Does South Carolina risk hurting itself by opposing Georgia’s harbor deepening project, considering that President Obama has named it a piece of his infrastructure agenda?

It’s unlikely, said Leslie Blakey, president and executive director of The Coalition for America’s Gateways and Trade Corridors, a Washington-based nonprofit trade association.

“There’s no sense in Washington or among federal agencies of, ‘We’re going to punish them for this.’ I don’t think that is a hazard,” she said.

Still, Blakely said, the view from the outside may be worth considering along with the business climate.

“The growth in trade in the next 30-40 years would lead anyone who studies this sort of thing to think there is going to be more than enough business to go around for East Coast ports as well as Gulf Coast and all the way around the country.”